Hot Topics:

Airport solutions and controversies

By Aaron Harber

Posted:
12/15/2012 01:00:00 AM MST

There is nothing like overcoming the force of gravity and leaving the ground. This is why aircraft owners often wish members of the public complaining about airports could experience the sheer delight they experience. As non-flying citizens line up against pilots and aircraft owners, the controversies in urban General Aviation airports such as Boulder, Erie, and Longmont have generated much heat but not much light.

As I told a friend of mine who is a pilot, "The reality is small airports serve an elite group of people who use it primarily for pleasure." He agreed. The truth is these airports rarely have major commercial or economic development value and do not serve any significant community purpose.

Nevertheless, the truth is aircraft owners make substantial investments in their equipment and even built homes with hangars. They have reasonable expectations related to being able to use their equipment. Therefore municipalities should be committed to properly maintaining airports.

At the same time, aircraft owners and airport operators need to be cognizant of their deleterious impacts. Some pilots fly noisy equipment, get out of flight patterns, or unnecessarily go far too close to homes and businesses. Just as pilots love the relative calm they experience, citizens on the ground should not have their own enjoyment of life interrupted by aircraft buzzing them.

Advertisement

When it comes to local economies, the truth is small urban airports are non-factors. The business owners and executives making decisions to start major businesses in a community or move operations to it rarely consider the presence of a small airport. There are many far more important factors which come into play.

Airport supporters often spread disinformation by using biased studies to claim airports play an important economic role. These studies are commissioned by those seeking expansions and are done by companies who have conflicts of interest because they make a living doing such studies.

In advertisements taken out by Erie Airport supporters, the claim was made it generates $23 million worth of economic activity. These numbers were grossly inflated -- generated by using dubious "multiplier effects" along with unreasonable classifications (such as considering all part-time employees as full-time).

A better analysis is to look at the net real estate and sales taxes generated by airports. Suddenly numbers such as $23 million shrink 95 percent to the thousands. And if the comparison is made to other uses of the same real estate, airports usually represent a net tax loss for the community.

For example, the same study which claimed Erie's airport had an economic impact of about $23 million calculated the actual taxes paid by General Aviation visitors totaled less than $75,000. And sales taxes for all categories combined totaled under $200,000. And even some of these numbers were inflated.

Some airport proponents argue more visitors means more fuel sales taxes but airports which sell fuel do not send any of those tax revenues to local communities. This is why expanding small airports will not generate substantial numbers of new jobs or tax revenue.

Totally overlooked by those conducting economic studies is the fact the discomfort inflicted on citizens means uncompensated externalities -- air pollution, noise pollution, waking people at all hours of the night, and disturbing a community's enjoyment of its property -- are subsidizing airport activities. If a Free Market price were put on these factors, small urban airports would have a net negative economic impact. And the analysis gets worse for airports if alternative uses of airport properties are considered.

So what should we do? First, we should make sure airports are properly maintained. These costs usually are funded by the Federal Government, primarily from Passenger Fees paid by travelers, such as everyone taking flights from DIA.

Second, we should get pilots, airport operators, and community members together to find solutions -- ranging from adjustments in flight patterns to agreements for operating aircraft more courteously to eliminating some operations.

Third, don't expand airports. Pilots knew what their airport could support. Just as they say to their neighbors, "How can you complain about the airport when you knew it was there when you moved in?" opponents can retort, "How can you say any expansion is needed when you knew from the start what the airport's limitations were?"

By maintaining the commitment pilots reasonably expect, a community meets its obligations. And by doing their best to minimize the disruption and annoyance they cause, pilots can become better members of the community. In the long run, this is the win/win path for everyone.

Aaron Harber hosts "The Aaron Harber Show." He once was one of the nation's most frequent flyers and accumulated almost 10 million frequent flyer miles. He lives near the Erie Airport.

New coordinator pushes Buffs to work, play at level he expectsJim Leavitt has discovered this much about his new defense at Colorado: He has some talent with which to work, but his players need to put it in another gear. Full Story